Re: Daemons [Was: gob inside gnome-vfs ...]
- From: Michael Meeks <michael ximian com>
- To: Seth Nickell <snickell stanford edu>
- Cc: Jeff Waugh <jdub perkypants org>, vfs <gnome-vfs ximian com>, gnome-hackers gnome org
- Subject: Re: Daemons [Was: gob inside gnome-vfs ...]
- Date: 26 Jun 2002 09:28:52 +0100
Hi Seth,
On Wed, 2002-06-26 at 01:37, Seth Nickell wrote:
> > They're a bit of a pain from an administrative and support perspective,
> > things like oafd/bonobo processes lying around (Michael says the b-a one
> > cane be fixed now, with some careful thought), gconfd versions,
> > gnome-settings-daemon running or not, etc.
They shouldn't lie around, so ...
> I would propose we create a single super-daemon which you can write
> "plugins" for (that run in their own threads).
Sigh - this is really not going to work nicely - especially since you
almost always want to use CORBA to communicate with the daemon - and
that's not going to like threads.
Also, it would seem to make no sense to glub together a gnome-vfs
daemon, the gconf daemon, the a11y daemon and bonobo-activation (eg.)
I think it's probably better to make bonobo-activation more intelligent
with respect to daemons & displays [ a <daemon> tag in the .server file
? ] - and allow it to fork / reap daemons as the desktop starts / exits
etc.
I don't think there is really a problem with lots of small daemon
processes, as long as they all go away cleanly - especially if they have
distinct roles. The stability argument alone is quite telling I think.
Regards,
Michael.
--
mmeeks gnu org <><, Pseudo Engineer, itinerant idiot
[
Date Prev][
Date Next] [
Thread Prev][
Thread Next]
[
Thread Index]
[
Date Index]
[
Author Index]